Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN2 37
LANGUAGE
English 37
Search Results 0 to 36 of about 37 (some duplicates have been removed)
university press. it's a collection of scholarly and journalistic articles about the taliban and the environment in southern afghanistan and western pakistan. , and it born as an attempt at new america by a diverse group of researchers to get at some of the diversity of the taliban itself at the time when the united states was puzzling over the rejury gent as a movement and a political force in afghanistan. as a military challenge, and really a challenge that had been neglected in the years after the 2001 defeat of the islamic member of the afghanistan. and which revived and presented itself as a grave d.a. lem that toment obama administration as it arrived in 2009. our effort to cowhat think tanks do. provide ground for it an complexity and granularity about this phenomena. recognizing that the sort of clicheed image of one eyed -- and his band of the devoted and attractable fan net tack was inadequate and falsifying of the problem. so the purpose was not prosecute a particular view of the taliban but just to start to document some sections of the diversity. and some aspect
for smoking a cigarette. that's why the taliban were not that hard to overthrow in 2001, because the people of afghanistan turned against this barbaric code that the taliban were trying to impose. and this is, you know, in iraq and in afghanistan hardly two of the most liberal, cosmopolitan countries in the world. today i suspect you're seeing much the same thing happen in northern mali where the islamists have tried to impose a very brutal code, and i suspect it's not proving very popular. however, the reason why these groups can have end during appeal is because there's not a good alternative. and the problem that we faced, for example, in afghanistan is that brutal and unpopular as the taliban are, the government has often been worse because the government has not delivered any kind of justice. what the government delivers is a decision that goes to the highest bidder. and so that bad as the taliban y be, they're less corrupt. and you will get a more or less honest judgment out of them which will then be enforced with barbaric severity. that's not the ideal that people want, but it may b
't out in the service but what suicide bombers and the taliban are doing with the extreme understanding of the suny they also target the shia. that is appalling and a complete breakdown no government can allow that but it happens. iran has a strong shi'ah power with interests in the region. that balance has to be careful if you have an understanding it can ease the tension. >> host: molly is emerging as a battleground. >> guest: read the book it has the same paradigm just like these tribesmen, they have been marginalized resources stolen, retreated as other great citizens on their own traditional way and. there comes a point* they say even if it is enough to be killed and raped and tortured. they react it is not very civilized or educated part of the world. the only act is the primary goal to kill people with their response and then the cycle begins again. so if you can help resolve that the philippines have taken an initiative to reach out to the tribal groups they simply negotiated autonomy, preserve culture? find. we have no objection but that simple initiative, then human act and th
by people that said they would be executed for smoking a cigarette. that's where the taliban were not hard to overthrow in 2001 because the people of afghanistan turned against this code the taliban were trying to impose and this is in iraq and afghanistan hardly the most cosmopolitan countries in the world. today i suspect you see much the same thing happened where they tried to impose a very brutal quote and i suspect it's not proving very popular. however, the reason these groups can have the appeal is because there's not a good alternative, and the problem that we face for example in afghanistan is that brutal and unpopular as they are the government has often been worse because the government hasn't delivered any kind of justice. what the government delivers is a decision that goes to the highest bid so as bad as the taliban maybe they are less corrupt and you won't get a more or less honest judgment out of them that will then be enforced to the barbaric severity. that's not the ideal people want but it may be better than the alternative and so i think the challenge we face in the cou
with their six-month deadline on top of the taliban. you ever envision where the taliban as a political party functioning the society. and do you think that the likelihood of the strategy is the best on long-term? >> she's has to live the questions. the first is to speak in terms of where they see the taliban output level and where they see the taliban integrated the mainstream in their society. they do have constitutional obligations to uphold and we are also looking not the united states in afghanistan as well. there is a timeline right now of an election to be held in afghanistan i see now. the desire processes and political decisions to make themselves. and when i say this, i do want to point that historic shift of pakistan is consciously and proactively making. our government has been very clear, including all are stakeholders that pakistan is going to strenuously support all efforts at stabilizing afghanistan and bringing peace to the region because that is banal our vital interests. as i said to me cannot walk away from the region. is faithful and peaceful afghanistan is in the first i
the isaf numbers that they said their correct in the numbers on a number of taliban attacks last year. a couple questions. the report to congress is based on our numbers, are you going to correct a report? also, does this lead to a rethinking about sure strength of the taliban, given you miscalculated the tax initiative? >> this is a regrettable error that was discovered during a routine quality check. making the appropriate adjustments. the fact that 80% of the violence taking place in areas remains unchanged. as we've said repeatedly, we pushed the taliban out of the population centers and they've failed to retake any areas they lost during the surgeon this remains true. additionally, the trend to currently are annoyed for the vast majority of operations and have taken a leading role in providing security for 87% of the country's population. there's a tendency to fixate on one metric, a particular database number or insider attacks are casualties. the complete picture process in afghanistan is more nuanced and i would encourage you to look at the overall picture. we're looking to fi
karzai and david cameron had a meeting to spend a six-month deadline on tax of the taliban. two ambition i pakistan was a political party functioning in society? and two, to think the footprint strategy is fun for the united states in afghanistan long-term? >> the first one is to speak to in terms of where they see the taliban up but i love all an integrated in the mainstream of society. they do have constitutional obligations they seem to uphold that we are also looking with the united states transitions and if ken estanislao. there is a timeline as well in an election to be held in afghanistan. so these are processes and political decisions they must make themselves. and when i say this, i do want to point to the historic ship that pakistan is proactively making. our government has been clear, including all of our stakeholders, which includes the military that pakistan is going to strenuously support all efforts of stabilizing afghanistan and bringing peace to the region because that is the know our vital interests. we live right they are and it's stable and peaceful afghanistan is in
the presidential radio address about that on the treatment of women and children in afghanistan by the taliban and right after that i was here in austin visiting jenna who was in texas, and we went shopping. the ladies at the cosmetic counters, who worked at the cosmetic counter in the department store came up and said thank you so much for speaking for women in afghanistan. that was really the first time that i thought hey they heard me. and i think i knew intellectually intellectually that the first lady had a podium but i didn't really know it until i saw that. the library of congress recently accepted the papers of clay t. whitehead who helped lay the groundwork for the modern telecommunications industry. as a member of the nixon administration, mr. whitehead that government efforts to deregulate telecommunications and break up the indications monopolies like the bell companies leading the way for cable tv, cell phones and other technologies. this library of congress discussion with former colleagues is an hour and 40 minutes. >> mrs. whitehead members and friends of the whitehead family a
in powering afghan communities to defend against taliban intimidation and violence. plans are being developed to increase the authorized size of the alp program from 30,000 to 45,000. the next centcom commander will also play an important role in shaping our enduring partnership with afghanistan after 2014. the partnership that i fully support. ike m. concerned however by the plants to reduce the afghan national security forces by a third starting in 2015. 352,000 to 230,000 by 2017. i believe that any future reductions in the size of the afghan forces should be based on security conditions in afghanistan at that time and this afghan security forces make and providing for their country security, we should reassure them that we will continue to support these efforts by deciding that as we withdraw our forces that there won't get drawdown and afghan forces. progress in afghanistan remains fragile and significant challenges to afghanistan's long-term stability remain. among the greatest threat to its stability are the safe havens for afghan insurgents across the pakistan border. the government o
and the taliban are doing, because of their very extreme understanding of sunni islam, they're also targeting the shia. for example in pakistan, where i was commissioner, they killed 100 shia. that's appalling. a complete breakdown of law and order. no government can allow that and yet it happens. iran is a very strong, aggressive, shia power and it has interests in the region. so, again, it's on great game. balance has to be kept. so if you have an understanding in terms of the region, i think it can share. >> host: the country al -- of mali is entering. >> guest: you have being hearing about the tribes. they have been marginalized their lands robbed, million raleigh sources storm, really treated as third rate citizens on their own land by their central government. so their there comes a point when they say, enough is enough, we're going to react, and they react. unfortunately this is not a very civilized or very educated part of the world. these are tribesmen. most of them are illiterate. they only act according to their open tribal codes and the primary code is the law of revenge so they g
overthrew the taliban in afghanistan and then got out of there. of course, afghanistan fell apart and we had go back. anorak it's falling apart very, very quickly. we are facing an insurgency, we don't know what to do. like nagl, all the officers who were there hadn't been trained to fight this sort of war. they do know what to do so they did what they usually do. which was to bang down doors and arrest and kill people, which is anybody who would read nagl what is known is counterproductive because you wind up killing the wrong people. you inflame, you this off their brother and their cousins and they become insurgents, too. so the insurgents is going. meanwhile, petraeus upend mosul besides to put into effect the ideas of these books he's been reading. so he and his guys, they start setting up elections for the new district council. they set up the elections. they bring in fuel trucks from turkey. they read open the university. they get to mutation systems going. they get some iraqis to open up newspapers. he opens up the border to syria along northern iraq. it is all this on his own. he's
organization. it belongs to no state. attacking states, laying low state government, defeating the taliban, al qaeda, making war in it will not stop it because terrorism like steanlt like markets are independenter in their character. what we have created beginning of the 21st century is a deep symmetry between the challenges we face and the political response the political institutions we have to respond to that. every challenge is interdependent global cross frontier and the primary political actors that respond are bounded, frontiered, independent nation states. and in that a symmetry, you can see the dysfunction of the modern world. we watch, for example, starting four or five years ago in copenhagen and going through mexico city and due by and recent meetings where 180 or 190 nations came together to renew the protocol already out of date in term of the ecological challenges but to embrace that now and failing to do so. and going home and saying that is because our sovereignty said china, the u.s., now canada, even leaders doesn't permit us to monitor. doesn't permit us to report to intern
. it was deliberate because the plan was overthrow saddam and get out. just like we overthrew the taliban in afghanistan and then got out of there and of course afghanistan fell apart. i and iraq is falling apart very quickly. we are facing an insurgency we don't know what to do with like all the officers who are there have not been trained to fight this sort of war. it was not in the manuals and they didn't know what to do so they do what they usually do which was to bang down doors and arrest people. anyone who has read kahlÚa would have known as counterproductive because you end up killing the wrong people and you inflame -- you make them mad so the insurgents is flaming and meanwhile petraeus in mosul decides to put into effect the ideas in these books he has been reading. he and his guys start setting up an election for the new district. they vet the candidates candidatecandidate s and they said that the elections. they bring in fuel trucks. they reopened the university. they get communication systems going. they get some iraqis to open up newspapers. he opens up the border to syria
qaeda, the taliban, and its associated forces. second, in this conflict, as indeed in any conflict, the united states is lawfully entitled. and finally, whatever the constitution's due process guarantees may require before targeting a u.s. citizen, these requirements are more than satisfied by rigorous judgment that a person needs the administration's narrow targeting. to understand why this position must be correct, consider a domestic hostage situation. in such a situation, even law enforcement will use this command it will do so without judicial preapproval when the threats of the lives of the hostages is serious. nobody takes the position that such actions constitute and killings. it is not profoundly different from this hostage situation. a mounting chorus of critics has insisted that judicial review must be a feature of the framework that authorizes the targeting of american nationals. whatever the merit of these mechanisms, one point is very clear. current law simply does not provide for prospective judicial involvement in targeting decisions. it is therefore hard for having
? >> guest: well, you again are talking about a country that was in shambles after the taliban were kicked out. it's a country that's been in war for 30 some years. so governance is everything from cleaning the streets to setting up a finance ministry to collect revenue. so we and our allies have been spending billions of dollars to try to strengthen the government, rebuild the government so they can take on its responsibilities. >> host: from your latest report what are some of your concerns of how this money is been spent? 4 billion for questionable spending for fuel for afghan national army. 70 million for possibly unusual national police headquarters. the list goes on. what's happening? >> guest: we are funny problems in a lot of areas. and what we highlight is that there are probably seven big areas, 70 questions, that if you're going to succeed -- seven big questions, and we hope the u.s. government and our allies succeed, you need to focus on these seven questions. to make certain you're going to succeed. number one, is that program our policy that we are funding, does it meet our n
. we went because it met our goal to give it about qaeda. we have been in the taliban government and set the country sorted into free play, we develop some kind of moral responsibility for helping them get it right. third, geostrategic plates in america in the world's interest to have a stable region. if afghanistan were unstable, acting pakistan's stability would be very tenuous and it challenges anyway, but i think it's important. my view is that we need to do is be persistent and consistent in the region. the reason people are so nervous is because in 2004 the inc. were going to leave and they seemed asleep before. in 1989 returned from the region. it doesn't matter whether each afghan style that appeared its become a commonly accepted truth that we left in 1989 and they're starting to think we're going to walk in 2014 and there will be nobody they can rely on. they'll have other strategic allies. so what they looking for is the idea of a long-term strategic partnership. i don't think that the specific number of troops. i think it's the idea you got an ally somewhere in their
not for afghans. they didn't invite in 2001. it meant our goal to get rid of al qaeda. when we upped the taliban government and set the country in to free play, i think we developed a responsibility for helping them set it right. third, i think in america and the world's interest to have a stability region. if afghanistan were to be completely unstable, i think pakistan's stability would be very tenuous. and they have challenges anyway. i think it's important. so my view what we need to do is be consistent and persistent in the region. the reason people in afghanistan are nervous because in 2004, they think we're going leave and they have seen us leave before. in 1989 we turned from the region. it doesn't matter which each individual afghan saw that. it's become commonly accepted truth we left in 19 the 9 ab and they're walk in 2014. and they'll be nobody they can rely on. they don't have other strategic allies. what they're looking for, in my view, the idea of a long-term strategic partnership. i don't think that's a specific number of troops in a specific amount of money. ink it's the idea you
to get rid of al qaeda. but we appended the taliban government and set the country in the free plate i think we develop some kind of moral responsibility for helping them set it right. third dimaggio's strategically at think it is in america and the world's interest to have a stable region. if america were to be completely unstable i think that pakistan stability would be very tenuous and they have challenges in the way, but i think it is important so my view is what we need to do is be consistent and persistent in the region. the reason people in afghanistan are so nervous is because in 2004 they think we're going to leave, and they have seen it happen before. in 1989 returned from the region. the intimate does not matter whether each individual afghan saw that, it has become commonly accepted truth that we left in 1989, and they're starting to think we're just going to walk in 2014 and there will be nobody that they can rely on. they do not have other judges to catalyze. so what they're looking for in my view is the idea of all long-term should jiji partnership. i don't think that is
in the justice department to make membership in al qaeda or the taliban itself a crime. but that was rejected because they thought the idea of mia membership as a crime was seen as it had very bad optics, one senior official in the pentagon told me it sounds like having a fought crime from 1984. that would be a problem. theythought crime from 1984. that would be a problem. they did decide to import conspiracy and civilian law to military law. it is easy to prove as opposed to things they are conspiring to do more have done. for the same reason it has been disfavored as a war crime. the nuremberg tribunal rejected conspiracy conviction for the most part. the rationale is just that the nature of armed conflict is doing things in a group. since that is what the entire endeavour is, to unmask coordinated violence, making one participant guilty of the act of all the other participants would be too broad. that is the rationale. but what happened with the twenty-first century military commission project was several civilian crime such as conspiracy were imported into this military code but it raise
it said local taliban was working with warlords to provide guards and weapons for the use of the contract. it came out that they were failing to adequately investigate the previous employment which resulted in the company's hiring individuals who previously had been fired for sharing sensitive information. security information with the taliban war lords and failure to appropriately some of according to the u.s. intelligence reports may have been involved in anti-american activity. all of that information was out in a classified we several weeks before it to attend comes out of 28 and was out in public of september 28th. guess who the state department gave the contract to for guarding them on the 29th. the eodt and then the were fired for never performing because they couldn't perform accurately. they wanted to litigate. meanwhile guess who is still guarding. we had egis guarding which was another contract of kabul. we still have armored troops then we did a contract with the jet. they finally took over the summer. i urge you all to take a look and you do not have to come secretary, you ca
. it was to liberate because the plan was overthrow saddam, get out of there, just like we overthrew the taliban in afghanistan and god as they are and of course afghanistan fell apart and we had to go through that. we are facing an insurgency. we don't know what to do. all the officers there hadn't been trained to fight this sort of war. the listening manuals. they did what they usually do, banged on doors and arrest and kill people and anyone who had read kahlÚa or naco what now is counterproductive because you end up killing the wrong people. he off their cousins and brothers who may become insurgents, too. so petraeus in mozilla decides to put into effect the ideas he's learned. so he and his guys, they start setting up an election for the new district council. they said at the elections. they bring in field trip from turkey. they get communications systems going. they get iraqis to open up newspapers. he opens at the border to syria along northern iraq. he does all this on his own. he's not touring with coronation of anybody, washington or baghdad or any place that works for a while and th
the medicine 2001. we met our goal to get rid of al qaeda. we have under the taliban government and set the country started into screenplay, we developed some more responsibility for helping him set a rate third, i think it's an america in the center a stable region. if afghanistan were completely unstable, who'd be very tenuous but it's important. we need to be consistent and persistent in the region. the reason people in afghanistan are so nervous is because in 2004 they think we're going to leave and 18 asleep before. in 1889, we turn from the region. it doesn't matter whether each individual afghans saw that, it's become commonly accepted truth they don't have other strategic allies. so what they're looking for in my view is the idea of a long-term strategic partnership. but i think that's a specific number of troops, even a specific amount of money. their fear is they are very far away. i was asking him this question. i said what you want in the future years quite homage to see what here? said a word about business and i'll be here taking money. because if you're making money here
in afghanistan by the taliban and right after that i was here visiting jenna who was in texas. we went shopping and the ladies at the cosmetic counter who worked in the cosmetic counter in the department store came up and said bank you so much for speaking for women in afghanistan. that was really the first time that i thought, they heard me. and i think i knew intellectually that the first lady had a podium but i didn't really know it until i did that. half of the cuts would come from the pentagon and the other half from non-defense discretionary programs. today representatives of the defense contractors educational institutions and other groups held a news conference to call on congress to come up with an alternative to the automatic cuts. >> welcome and good morning everyone. i am at emily and i'm the executive director of the coalition for health funding and the cochair of and dd united representing the full breadth of interest in non-defense discretionary programs. and dd programs are core government functions provided for the benefit of all including public health and safety, law enforcem
the presidential radio address about this, the treatment of women and children and afghanistan by taliban to invite after that i was married. and often dating jenna who was in texas, and we went shopping, and the ladies at the cosmetics counter the work of the cosmetic counter in the department store came up and said thank you so much for speaking for women in afghanistan. and that was really the first time that i thought, hey, they heard me. and i think i knew intellectually that the first lady had a podium, but i didn't really know it until after the. >> ceased its new series, first ladies, influence and image, a first of his current project for television examining the public and private lives of the women who serve as first lady. season one begins next monday, presidents' day, at 9 p.m. eastern and pacific on c-span, c-span radio and c-span.org. >> this morning the senate judiciary subcommittee on constitution civil rights and human rights will hold a hearing on proposals to reduce gun violence. the u.s. senate is about the gavel and. members expect to finish up work today on the violence again
afghan communities to defend against taliban intimidation and violence. plans are being developed to increase the authorized size of the program from 30,000 down to 45,000. the next commander will also play an important role in shaping our partnership with afghanistan after 2014. a partnership that i fully support. i am concerned however by plans to reduce the afghan national security forces by a third starting in 2015. of retreated 52,000 to two injured 30,000 by 2017. i believe any future reductions in the size of the afghan forces should be based on security conditions in afghanistan at that time and as afghan security forces' progress in providing for their country's security, we should reassure them that we will continue to support these efforts by citing as we withdraw our forces that there won't be a drawdown in afghanistan forces. progress in afghanistan remains fragile, significant challenges to afghanistan's long-term stability remains. among the greatest threat to the stability is the safe havens for the afghan insurgents across the pakistan border which the government
to us and said they were going to renounce themselves from the taliban. and this is how i believe we win the war, for what it's worth. i believe that by lowering the supporters of the taliban and by that and stopping their freedom of movement, we win the war and stop terrorism. so that's what we were trying to do on this mission. but almost immediately upon entering the village, my team was under attack. it was an ambush, and it was big. it didn't take me long to realize that it wasn't a normal ambush. i've been in quite a few fire fights by this time, but it's like at the first of any fire fight it's kind of like the dust comes in, you try to figure out any situation, the dust comes in, you figure it out, and then your training kicks in, and you just start doing your job after about 10 or 15 minutes. but not in this fight. it was like one thing after another started to fail us. and everything started to fall like a house of cards. everything that we relied on in every other fire fight to support us wasn't happening. it was like our mission was falling quickly like a house of cards. and
, the taliban and associated forces in response to the 9/11 attacks. and we may also use force consistent with our inherit right of national self-defense. there is nothing in international law that bans the use of remotely piloted aircraft for the purpose or that prohibits us from usinglet l force against our enemies outside of an active battle field. at least when the country involved can sense or is unable or unwilling to take action against the threat. second, targeted strikes are ethical. without question, the ability to target a specific individual from hundreds or thousands of miles away raises profound questions. here i think it is useful to consider such strikes against the basic principles of the law of war that governor the use of force. targeted strikes conform to the principle of necessity. the requirement that the target have definite military value. in this armed conflict, individuals who are part of al qaeda or associated forces are legislated mate, military targets. we have the authority to target them with lethal force, just as we target enemy leaders in past conflicts. s
-qaeda, the taliban and associated forces in response to the 9/11 attacks, and we may also use force consistent with our inherent rights of self-defense -- of national self-defense. there is nothing in international law that bans the use of remotely-piloted aircraft for this purpose or that prohibits us from using lethal force against our enemies outside of an active battlefield, at least when the country involved consents or is unable or unwilling to take action against the threat. second, targeted strikes are ethical. without question the ability to target a specific individual from hundreds or thousands of miles away raises profound questions. here i think it is useful to consider such strikes against the basic principles of the law of war that govern the use of force. targeted strikes conform to the principle of necessity. the requirement that the target have definite military value. in this armed conflict, individuals who are part of al-qaeda or its associated forces are e legitimate military targets. we have the authority to target them with lethal force just as we target enemy leaders in
, the united states is in an armed conflict with al qaeda, the taliban, an associate of forces, in response to the 9/11 attacks, and we may also use force consistent with our inherent right of national self-defense. there is nothing in international law that bans the use of remotely piloted aircraft for this purpose or that prohibits us from using lethal force against our enemies outside of an active battlefield, at least when the country involved consents or is unable or unwilling to take action against the threat. second, targeted strikes are ethical. without question, the ability to target a specific individual, from hundreds or thousands of miles away, raises profound questions. here, i think it is useful to consider such strikes against the basic principles of the law of war that govern the use of force. targeted strikes conform to the principles of necessity, the requirement that the target has definite military value. in this armed conflict, individuals who are part of al qaeda or its associated forces are legitimate military targets. we have the authority to target them with lethal
days of the war in afghanistan. on that day, hundreds of taliban fighters ambushed american combat outposts from all sides with grenades, machine guns, mortars and rifles. heavily outnumbered, clint and his fellow soldiers quickly fought back in what would turn out to be a deadly day-long battle. sergeant romashay fought valiantly. he darted into danger to draw out the enemy many times. he himself took out a machine gun team. he was working to take out a second when he was wounded by shrapnel from an exploding grenade. his medal of honor citation reads -- quote -- "undeterred by his injuries, staff sergeant romashay continued to fight, and upon the arrival of another soldier to aid him and the assistant gunner, he again rushed through the exposed avenue to assemble additional soldiers. with complete disregard for his own safety, he continually exposed himself to heavy enemy fire as he moved confidently about the battlefield engaging and destroying multiple enemy targets, end of quote. staff sergeant romesha exemplified the values that theodore roosevelt, also a medal of honor reci
, it was after i made the address about three minute women and children in afghanistan by the taliban. and right after that i was here in austin visiting jenna at texas. we went shopping and the ladies -- who worked at cosmetic counter came up and said thank you for speaking for women in afghanistan. and i think i knew intepght julie that the first lady had a podium. i didn't really know it until after that. >> c-span new series plateds influence and image. the first of the kind project for television. examining the public and private lives of the women who served as first ladies. season one begins next monday. president's day at 9:00 p.m. eastern and pacific. on c-span, c is c-span radio, and c-span.org. >>> next at the discussion on the u.s. and european economies. panelists discuss factors contributing to a weak u.s. economic recovery. unemployment, and federal reserve monetary policy. a representative from germany looked a the eurozone financial crisis. major challenges the european economy as well as the impact of environmental and industrial full employment and process perty. it's ninety m
and this kid is out there in the middle of nowhere with 400 taliban and in the middle east and he's tremendously courageous and tremendously brave and taking them on saving not only fellow soldiers, but ultimately saving database. ask about bravery and courage go on often every day in a war zone and i just think it's difficult to think that everybody who performs in that kind of fashion that somehow we have to establish, you know, a separate fund to try to assist them. the reality is that men and women in uniform put their lives on the line every day. it's a sacrifice for this country. and i think the great thing about this country is that there are those that are willing to do that and not worry about whether or not they're going to get an award for additional pay, but they just do it because they love this country. >> secretary, why did you, general dempsey and secretary clinton recommend that the u.s. provide weapons to the rebel forces in syria? were you disappointed the white house turned that down? and do you think is the result of that that this war could go on endlessly? >
settlement with the taliban parts would that be useful? >> well, first of all i think the terrible bomb blast do underline what i think emphasized throughout the presentation is that terrorism remains one of the most serious threats we face, and this is one of the issues united states and india has worked on closely together. i'm not sure that it could be homegrown terrorism. we have had a number of tax which have been traced to inspiration outside the country i don't know yet. we will have to wait until the investigation reports are being completed. but counterterrorism certainly has attracted the attention of our government at the highest levels. we have developed a number of new mechanisms, both in terms of intelligence, in terms of the coordination between central government and the states because policing the estate subject. and, indeed, for instant checking and working out -- but like every other country, we are on the frontline of terrorism. we perhaps a little more than others, and we need to reinforce our efforts. and we will certainly be hoping to work very closely with our u.s. par
teenagers, generally want to stop at the time they're 30 and 20 taliban it's bad for them, you remind them of the fact that they couldn't control their own destiny so they get anxious, and what did they do? facebook. it's a coping mechanism. we get a large trial at colombia university sponsored by the nih. wanting as with which we can have depressed people in the trial. we had to cancel the trial but we couldn't find a single smoker who was not clinically depressed. the fundamental insight yet again is what to do to help these folks? i would argue that you take a couple different paths. one is show them what's happening. this is what a smoker's lung looks like. you can't hide from the. just look at the darn thing. at 11:00 you see that? as emphysema. the dark tar deposits is pretty evident as well from the cigarettes. and when you see that you have awareness and understanding why this matters to you. but the second insight you have, we offer is there certain times you can change people's minds. as a heart surgeon i don't have a lot of control of people who come in for surgery. i've done my
Search Results 0 to 36 of about 37 (some duplicates have been removed)